City Research Online

Critical essay: Blinding faith – Paradoxes and pathologies of opacity in peer review

Willmott, H. ORCID: 0000-0003-1321-7041 (2021). Critical essay: Blinding faith – Paradoxes and pathologies of opacity in peer review. Human Relations, doi: 10.1177/00187267211016752

Abstract

The standing and progress of science depends upon confidence in the evaluation of knowledge claims. This essay affirms the value of peer review as a ‘gold standard’ but argues that its efficacy for scientific progress is, on balance, diminished by blinding. It reflects critically upon the anomaly between an ethos of openness that is widely held to define scientific work, and the opacity institutionalized in reviewing and editorial processes, with specific reference to the field of management and organization studies. The anomaly is attributed to the operation of asymmetrical relations of power in the establishment and reproduction of evaluation processes. The proposed means of mitigating the anomaly, and thereby improving manuscript evaluation, is movement in the direction of more open peer review.

Publication Type: Article
Publisher Keywords: anonymity, asymmetrical relations of power, blinding, confidentiality, editorial practice, ethical principles, evaluation processes, secrecy
Subjects: L Education > LB Theory and practice of education > LB2300 Higher Education
Departments: Bayes Business School > Management
Date available in CRO: 02 Jul 2021 12:10
Date deposited: 2 July 2021
Date of acceptance: 31 March 2021
Date of first online publication: 19 May 2021
URI: https://openaccess.city.ac.uk/id/eprint/26349
[img]
Preview
Text - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution International Public License 4.0.

Download (203kB) | Preview

Export

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

View more statistics

Actions (login required)

Admin Login Admin Login